EcoWalktheTalk » Energy/Renewableshttp://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog
Asia's Environmental Community featuring Eco News, Insights, People and Living TipsFri, 12 Dec 2014 05:25:41 +0000en-UShourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=3.7.5Bicycle Hire Service in Hangzhou, China – World’s Biggesthttp://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2011/09/15/bicycle-hire-service-in-hangzhou-china-worlds-biggest/
http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2011/09/15/bicycle-hire-service-in-hangzhou-china-worlds-biggest/#commentsThu, 15 Sep 2011 09:18:31 +0000http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/?p=8107With over 50,000 bikes available to rent, Hangzhou in China is aiming to reduce pollution, cut congestion, and keep its people healthy – all while making a profit!

By Jeremy Torr

Just a dozen of the 50, 000 city rental bikes in Hangzhou, China.

If you thought Paris had a lot of city rental bikes at 20,000, think again. The city of Hangzhou in China beats that hands down with 50,000 – and that makes it the biggest city bike hire system in the world. But typically of Chinese vision, that’s just the start. The plan is to expand to 175,000 bikes by 2020.

Hangzhou’s riders make an average of 240,000 trips every day, which is pretty impressive. According to Bike-Sharing blog, Lu Zhihong, Deputy General Manager, Hangzhou Public Transport Corporation says that public bicycle outlets will become as popular as public telephone booths along city streets. “In the future, residents will largely ride bicycles to go shopping in food markets and supermarkets, or to go to the office,” he says.

The city elders decided to implement the system – and make it easy and attractive – after realising that the national move to car ownership and usage was clogging up the roads, destroying the purity of the air and even more importantly to the world’s manufacturing engine, making people late for work.

There are more than 2,000 bike-share stations in Hangzhou

The Hangzhou Public Bicycle Service (HPBS) system’s popularity and success have set a new standard for bike-sharing in Asia. There are more than 2,000 bike-share stations that are dotted about the city, and the scheme that started in May 2008 has around 30,000 individual rentals on a typical day and is underwritten by the local government to keep costs low and locals pedaling. To rent a bike, people simple swipe their ID card and pay 200 Yuan as a deposit. After that, the service is free for the first hour, and then riders pay one yuan ($.30) for up to two hours. They can keep the bike out for up to 24 hours, but that costs three yuan per hour so the accent is on short trips.

And it’s working. Earlier this year, HPBS claimed each bike was used an average of 5 times each day by different riders. Additionally, in contrast with many European bike-share systems, HPBS has embedded a paypoint directly into the bikes. This makes it easier for a user to end a rental by slotting a bike into a bike rack, swiping their local transport card over the bike itself, and walking away.

This, says HPBS, reduces time to check the bike in from about five minutes to just one minute, something riders in London, Barcelona and Paris will appreciate. The system is currently not turning a profit, but the local government hopes to turn that round with the provision of advertisements on the bikes and at bike return spots.

To rent a bike, people simple swipe their ID card and pay 200 Yuan as a deposit.

And what about “losses”? According to HPBS, not a single bike was stolen in the service’s first year of operation, and very few have been damaged or vandalised. In contrast, London’s Boris Bikes suffered from six docking stations being hit by motor vehicles and six more vandalised in the first six months with up to third of the fleet needing some kind of refurbishment or repair. Likewise Paris’s Velib bike-share program has reported that almost half of the original Velibs were stolen, or damaged. So much for the French being bicycle lovers!

About our Guest Writer:Jeremy Torr, the managing editor of Gaia Discovery, is a lifelong cyclist, traveller, and keen greenie now residing in Singapore. He has written for and edited international publications like PC Magazine, SilverKris and Discovery Channel Magazine.The independent publication Gaia Discovery promotes responsible travel, eco-living, and heritage. It is a platform for subject experts to voluntarily contribute articles to for greater awareness of important social and environmental issues in Asia. Follow Gaia Discovery on Facebook and Twitter.

Thomas Friedman, one of the world’s most influential columnists with The New York Times, with a following of over 20 million readers, and best-selling author of “Hot, Flat and Crowded” was in town (Singapore) yesterday to give an interesting lecture on “Why We Need a Green Revolution.”

He was invited by the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKYSPP), one of Asia’s leading thinktanks, and introduced to the audience by the Dean of the School, Dr Kishore Mahbubani. Dr Mahbubani himself is a well known public figure in the region, and author of books such as “Can Asians Think” and “Beyond the Age of Innocence.” He commenced the night with a sober note, “We are facing the biggest challenge in human history. The Earth is in distress. We don’t know what to do, and how to do it.”

Friedman asserted that though Hot, Flat and Crowded prima facie talks of energy and the environment, it is essentially about America rediscovering its ‘groove’ as a global leader by addressing the major and pressing problems of the world.

Hot is the planet warming up with increasing human made greenhouse gas emissions in the thin atmosphere that blankets it. Flat is a globalised and interconnected world, where rising middle classes aspire for higher “America –like’” consumption standards. Crowded is because our population is going to balloon to 9 billion by 2050, with higher per capita consumption, and more pressure on the finite resources of the earth.

Here are some of the main points he brought out in his talk to an audience of about a thousand invited by the LKYSPP.

The environmental crisis and the financial crisis are flip sides of the same problem. 2007-2010 was when the markets and Mother Nature hit the wall, an early warning heart attack that we are growing unsustainably -financially and ecologically.

The world is seeing a never ending growth loop which is clearly unsustainable and has to be broken. Friedman explained it thus:

More and more factories built in China –> More and more stuff produced –> More and more coal used (with emissions) –>More and more dollars for China –>More and more Treasury Bills issued by the US –>More and more factories in China…and back again to the loop.

The fundamental problems in both financial markets and in Mother Nature are due to three fold reasons. We are

Underpricing Risk (such as credit risk in subprime mortgage or the risk of carbon molecules in fossil fuel emissions)

Privatising Gain ( Profits accrue to owners of capital who benefit from financial markets, or due to cheap oil and coal)

Socialising Losses ( If things blow up, the taxpayer bears the losses through bailouts, and our children and future generations pay the consequences of disruptive climate change)

There is a larger ‘values breakdown’ in society. We have moved from sustainable values that used to be the basis for relationships, communities, business and politics, to situational values of the baby boomer generation. Ploughing up hundreds of acres of biodiverse Amazon rainforest to plant soyabean, is an example of situational value which places financial gain over long term sustainable value – which would dictate that this is the wrong thing to do.This is dangerous, because both markets and Mother Nature are fiercesome, cruel and unemotional when it comes to excesses. According to Friedman, if we don’t find a more sustainable way we will be ‘less free than if the Soviet Union had won the cold war.’

Friedman sees five megatrends that impact the world tremendously:

- Supply and Demand of Energy and Natural Resources. Demand is increasing at a mind boggling rate, with the rise of new consumerist middle classes in China and India and other nations. In two cities he had visited – Doha in Qatar and Dalian in China, another ‘Manhattan’ had sprung up in a span of only three years. This kind of development has staggering implications for resource and energy use. Friedman calls this the problem as ‘Too Many Americans.’ If the whole world caught up with American consumption rates, it would mean an equivalent of 72 billion people on this planet.

- The impact on Petropolitics is the clear inverse relationship between the price of oil and the political freedom in the major oil exporting nations – which is graphed by the ‘Freedom Index’ By increasing our demand for fossil fuels, we are indirectly supporting petrodictatorships in these countries.

- Climate Change as an issue is so polluted by climate deniers, he prefers not to use the term Global Warming using ‘Global Wierding’ instead. This is because the result of increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is going to be increasingly extreme, frequent, and violent weather patterns.

In a tongue-in-cheek way, Friedman says he prefers to be like “Dick Cheney” during the Iraq war, who said “if there is 1% chance that nuclear weapons are found in Iraq, it would irreversible and catastrophic.”
Likewise he says, “If there is even 1% chance that what climate scientists say is true, it would be irreversible and catastrophic for the planet.”

- Energy Poverty is something 1.6 billion people on this planet face as they are not connected to electric grid. This is going to leave behind a vast part of the population behind, as they have inadequate access to water, education, and technology.

- Biodiversity Loss is happening at an unprecedented rate. We are facing the fastest rate of extinction since the age of the dinosaurs – about 1 new species every 20 minutes disappears, which is about 1000 times the background rate of extinction.

Friedman asserts that all these 5 problems can be solved by the “Green Revolution” by finding a way to produce “abundant, cheap, clean and reliable electrons” and the country which does that will get the most global respect. He wants that country to be America, as he thinks this is the only way that clean technology and energy will scale up with the speed required to solve the global crisis. It’s not going to be ‘easy’ – a revolution implies suffering and radical change. At the moment, the world is seeing is only incremental and small scale change – or to put it more cynically, “we’re all having a big green party.”

According to Friedman, “We’ll know when we are really having a Green Revolution and that is when the word “green’ disappears. There won’t be a ‘green’ building. You simply won’t be able to build something that doesn’t adhere to the highest energy and resource efficient standards. There won’t be a ‘green’ car, only a car which is built to highest mileage and environmental standards. “

Friedman lays more faith on engineers and entrepreneurs than on regulators or “192 countries trying to agree on reduction in emissions” as in the COP meetings, for change to happen. Price matters in the Green Revolution, and a durable, long term price system for carbon is critical. He also favours subsidy support to renewables especially in the intial take-off stages, as well as a carbon and gasoline tax to reduce the price advantage on fossil fuels.

For systemic change to happen that supports ‘an ecosystem of innovation’, one requires firm leadership and Friedman wishes America could be China for a day, just to be able to impose all the rules and regulations to support the green revolution, and let the system take over.

My thoughts on Friedman’s call for a green revolution:

- It looks increasingly like it may not be America’s call to take leadership on Climate Change. China for good or bad, does have the political advantange of firm leadership (or dictatorship) to make swift decisions on green technology. Friedman himself admitted during the Q & A that necessity is the “mother of innovation” and that China is moving faster toward clean technology, as it discovers the downsides of environmental pollution.

(According to BNEF, new global investment in clean energy reached $243 billion in 2010, up from $186.5 billion in 2009. Last year’s investment figures double those from 2006. The main factors in this growth were the massive Chinese market, the expansion of offshore wind, hot European solar markets and global R&D.

Investment in China was up 30% to $51.1bn in 2010, by far the largest figure for any country. In 2009 Asia and Oceania overtook the Americas, and in 2010 it narrowed the gap further on Europe, Middle East and Africa as the leading region of the world for clean energy investment. Facts from Renewable Energy World )

- My question to Friedman during the Q & A was that though removal of fossil fuel subsidies is one key step in giving the right price signals to the market, political leaders do get ‘wobbly knees’ when actually taking action on this front. I wanted to know if there are case studies of countries who have been successful with this. Look at India where the price of onions is enough to give politicians the jitters. (I also had at the back of my mind the reversal of Bolivian President Eva Morales’ decision to raise fuel prices over the new year. India too had deregulated petrol prices in June 2010 but not diesel prices because it was too sensitive an issue. )

Friedman didn’t answer my question directly, but he did give an interesting perspective about what fossil fuel subsidies really mean to an economy. If you don’t tax fuel in your country, you are simply handing that money over to the oil cartel, instead of using it for education, health and green tech within your own economy. Even though the per unit price of oil goes up, the total bill goes down leading to a more efficient system. Yes, it’s a difficult decision, but it has to be done, and all it may take is one gutsy polician to bring about that change.

- Friedman doesn’t really mention a role for civic society, in fact he dismisses all the small, green actions that individuals take, without a larger systemic, macroeconomic change happening. My take on this is yes, we absolutely need systemic change, but more often than not, it happens when millions of individuals start demanding that change, and no matter what level it is – at an individual level (as a consumer, employee or neighbour), at a community level, at a national or international level – it is at the end of the day, individuals and groups of ‘thoughtful citizens’ who will change the world.

We can’t hang around and wait much longer for that change to happen, as there is no “later” in Friedman’s sober conclusion. I share his cautious optimism in these words, “We have exactly enough time – starting now.”

About the writer:

Bhavani Prakash is the Founder of Eco WALK the Talk .com. She is passionate about the role of individuals and communities in bringing about the much needed change we need to see in the world. She was an economist in her previous avatar, and is now an environmental and social justice activist using social media as well as offline community participation in her advocacy of a greener, fairer and happier planet. She writes and conducts talks and workshops on sustainability and can be contacted at bhavani[at]ecowalkthetalk.com. Follow Eco WALK the Talk on Facebook,Twitter, Linked IN and YouTube

When Malavika Jain Bambawale opened her presentation with a picture of a Mongolian herdsman next to a solar panel, it was heartening to see how even the remotest corners of the world could now get the benefits of state-of-the-art technology.

Bambawale, a research fellow at the Lew Kuan Yew School of Public Policy spoke at the Institute of South East Asian Studies (ISEAS) in Singapore recently. She and her team members have been evaluating different ways through which solar technology has reached the poor and the poorly accessed in several Asian countries, in particular Laos, Mongolia, China, Thailand and Papua New Guinea.

Energy poverty is a stark reality for more than 22% of the world’s population. It is estimated that 1.6 to 2 billion people live without access to electricity.

Why is this so? In many parts of the world the grid is simply not practical due to a number of barriers. Remoteness coupled with poor infrastructure, decades of underinvestment, lack of public funds, misdirected subsidies and poor return on investment are all dissuading factors for the spread of the grid electricity.

Zahnd and Kimber [1], in their study of the remote and impoverished Himalayan villages of upper Humla in north-west Nepal, found that there are people who “still depend on the use of traditional biomass for their daily energy services such as cooking, heating and light. These activities on open fireplaces have a direct chronic impact on the health and extremely low life expectancy of the women and children along with devastating deforestation.” Other sources of energy are whatever is locally available including candles, car batteries, kerosene, firewood and animal waste.

The consequences of these make-shift sources translate into respiratory problems especially for women and children who are exposed to smoke. Their productivity and level of education are lowered due to reduced lighting hours.

Many kinds of off-grid technologies can enable such poor households get some basic conveniences that most of us take for granted, such as a light bulb, a television or a refrigerator. It is only to be expected that there is a strong relationship between economic prosperity and access to electricity.Having more light, heat or cooling can make a significant difference in a low-income household. It may allow for example, a basket weaver to work into the night increasing output, or a fisherwoman to store her catch and reduce spoilage.

E.F. Schumacher’s words of “Small is beautiful” has particular relevance where the grid fails to reach. Make power locally available to individuals through modern sustainable technologies. These could be Solar Home Systems (SHS), Rooftop Wind Turbines, Pico Hydro, Solar cookers, Biomass cookstoves and Biogas Digestors which also confer environmental benefits by reducing pressure on local deforestation and carbon emissions.

According to the ASTAE, the Asia Sustainable and Alternative Energy Program, “Solar energy has probably one of the highest theoretical potential of all renewables. The total annual radiation received on the land surface of the earth is about 3000 times the current world energy use. However, the important figure for any area is the ‘solar ratio’, which is equivalent to the solar input divided by the local energy use. This ratio varies from less than 100 in some energy-intensive countries to over 10,000 in some countries. Given the inefficiency of energy-conversion processes, the potential for solar to meet the basic energy needs of developing countries in Asia is large.”

How do we make the access of reliable home solar systems, by no means an easy task, to a Mongolian herdsman , or a villager in rural Asia or Africa? The various projects of rural electrification through solar show different success factors, and that we can’t have a one size fits all approach. Access to solar faces many barriers, such as market distortions, lack of capital and training, inadequate market size and consumer credit, but many of these are slowly being overcome.

Some of the examples and videos below indicate that there are many ways to deliver solar home systems (SHS), with different combinations of funding through subsidies or microcredits, delivery of equipment through dealerships, different pricing mechanisms through fixing of end user price or market driven pricing, and consumer credit options providing long term loans through dealers, microfinance organisations or local loan institutions.

Government help

In China, about 300-400,000 SHS units were targeted in 6 provinces in North West China with a population of 1.2 million remote villages. It was funded by GEF (Global Environment Facility under UNEP) and World Bank . The Chinese government through the Renewable Energy Development Program (REDP) programme took ownership of the program, as well as invested in technical improvement to increase the quality of the panels and reduce costs of solar home systems.

Credit was seen as a western concept as most consumers preferred to save and pay cash in full. Private distributors were given 50% funding after careful selection with proven sales. This was a good example of state and private sector participation which was critical in achieving success, and distribution was 450,000 units- in excess of targets.

This video summarises the China REDP program:

A similar model also operated in Outer Mongolia near Ulan Bator, through an International Development Agency(IDA) and GEF project to reach solar panels to 50,000 herders. This was another example of public-private partnership, with a central agency aggregating parts from China, establishing strong regulatory and technical standards, providing marketing support and 50% subsidy to dealers.

In Laos, private dealers got subsidies from the IDA but instead of outright sales, they leased the equipment to households. However in the process they did crowd out other private players who were not being subsidised.

How do the economics work for solar? The solar panels cost about US $100 for 10MW, $195 for 20MW and $450 for 50MW in Laos at 2009 prices, which are rapidly coming down. This compares favourably to the other sources of fuel such as kerosene, and makes it attractive for the poor. International agencies had started out distributing 100MW panels, but as Bambawale observed during her field trips, it is the 20MW and 10MW panels that are in greater demand.

Social Enterprises step in

There are other distribution models which have been successful in other countries. Grameen Sakhti, a non-profit organisation founded by Mohammed Yunus, Nobel Peace Prize winner in 2006, operates on a dealer credit model where the institution itself provides the solar panels and offers the full range of services – marketing, sales, service, credit provision, collections, guarantees, Set up 65,000 home systems in rural Bangladesh as shown in the video below:

Micro-finance institutions can help

Yet another model is where dealers tie up with microfinance institutions to provide consumer credit which is a far more accepted norm in a country like India. Take the case study of SELCO in Karnataka, India as showcased here.

Conclusion:

Photo: REEIN

Asia’s population is rapidly growing, and the conventional pollution causing and carbon emitting centralised grids based on coal, petroleum and natural gas are not the ideal solutions for the poor.

It is important for governments to build capacity in various ways to support the spread of off-grid technologies: Investment in technology and in technical standards, providing of the right policy framework for financing and credit institutions as well as regulatory bodies, market development through after-sales service and warranties, and in spreading awareness about the technology and its use.

Such support could prove critical to this industry which might otherwise not be able to take off on its own. In due course and in the long term, market forces may be able to sustain the momentum.

Many examples show what work and what don’t. The lessons need to be learnt and applied quickly, so that the power of the sun can reach millions whose quality of lives and incomes sadly lag way behind the rest of society.

Many thanks to Malvika Jain Bambawale for sharing her research at the Lee Kuan Yew Institute of Policy Studies during her talk at the Centre on Asia and Globalisation in Institute of South East Asean Studies (ISEAS), Singapore. Our gratitude to Anthony Louis D’Agostino for the photograph of the Mongolian herdsman.

The new-generation solar lanterns, to be manufactured by Sujana Energy and other Teri partners, will have features including bright white light emitting diode (LED) light, low-power consumption, and up to 7 hours of run time of up to 50,000 hours of LED life.

According to Teri, each solar lantern saves 40-60 litres of kerosene per year that translates to Rs10,000 crore spent annually on kerosene and wick lamps. A sum of Rs 2,34,000 crore would be required to provide solar lanterns to 65 million rural households that are not connected to the grid, forcing them to use kerosene lamps in India, the organisation claims.

]]>http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2010/10/02/reaching-solar-to-a-mongolian-herdsman/feed/0Wind Energy In India: Gone With The Wind?http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2010/09/21/wind-energy-in-india-gone-with-the-wind/
http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2010/09/21/wind-energy-in-india-gone-with-the-wind/#commentsTue, 21 Sep 2010 14:49:00 +0000http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/?p=4438India’s installed wind power capacity at 11.8 GW (Gigawatts) is fifth in the world, with the US leading at 35GW and China second at 25GW. The installed wind power capacity in India accounts for 6% of the total and generates for 1.6% of the country’s power, similar to the US where wind accounts for 2% of its total. (Source: Wikipedia)

Is there more to this than meets the eye? Are incentives to the wind energy sector really making an impact in India? Does installed capacity translate into actual power generation?

India made all kinds of noises about climate negotiations. No, we won’t do it. The west will have to pay. Alright. The west should pay. Agreed. And what are we going to do with the money? Invest in alternative energy, clean energy. Yeah right. And how are we going to do that?

Let’s take wind energy for instance. For years now it has been sucked dry due to corruption. And the government can’t do better than to make committees which investigate how the wind turbines blow away the monsoon clouds.

It’s been said here, and we will say it again. We need to cap corruption to stop climate chaos. Carbon’s got nothing to do with it.

“This is the real story of wind energy in India. The sector has, rightly, received huge incentives, but these have not upped power generation. As it emerges, companies have merrily installed plants, not to generate power, but to gain from tax and depreciation benefits. The business seems a closed loop—the turbine-maker makes deals with investor companies to set up plants. Nobody quite knows the cost of a windmill. The turbine-maker gains; the investor profits. Indeed, nobody seems really interested in selling power, increasing efficiency and cutting costs.”

While our rich look at wind energy as an ‘alternative’ way to save taxes, the poor of the world by their ingenuity are building wind turbines and generating their own electricity. See the amazing video on TED by William Kamkwamba below.

]]>http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2010/09/21/wind-energy-in-india-gone-with-the-wind/feed/0Challenges and Prospects for a Green Economyhttp://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2009/12/02/challenges-and-prospects-for-a-green-economy/
http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2009/12/02/challenges-and-prospects-for-a-green-economy/#commentsWed, 02 Dec 2009 12:15:28 +0000http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/?p=1247Why do businesses and governments need to develop a new paradigm to tackle the climate change challenge? Can they be green and still grow? What strategies will help an inclusive growth that promotes economic development while preserving ecosystems, and how can they be prioritized? What are the stumbling blocks in the path to greening the economy and how can they be overcome?

These were several of the stimulating questions answered by Pavan Sukhdev on December 1, 2009 in a seminar organised by the Singapore Environment Institute (SEI). Andrew Tan, from Centre for Liveable Cities, Singapore which co-hosted the event, made the introduction.

The TEEB highlights the economic impact of biodiversity loss. It parallels what the Stern report does to highlight the economic impact of climate change.

What is a green economy?

According to Pavan, it is easier to define a green economy by what it is not. A green economy does not consume natural capital or risk human survival.

World Footprint www.footprintnetwork.org

The ecological footprint of human activities as measured by the demand on the resources of Earth’s ecosystems, already exceeds the planet’s regenerative capacity by 40%. Humanity is now demanding 1.4 Earths. In fact, we have been in “ecological debt” for the last 20 years, using up natural “capital” instead of living off the “interest” it generates.

With Global Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at 42 GTCO2e (Gigatons) at 5 times higher than the Earth can absorb, the planet faces climate risk at a pace that can’t be sustained.

Watch Pavan Sukhdev talk about the consequences of the erosion of natural capital

Economies can adopt a more sustainable path, if they increase their investment in “green” sectors and the share of the GDP devoted to renewable energies, clean transportation, clean technologies, green buildings, waste management, water services, sustainable agriculture and forestries. Such investment will bring about an increase in quality and quantity of green jobs.

Concurrently, it is important to reduce the energy use per unit of production, as well as carbon emissions per unit of GDP, while minimizing wasteful consumption in various sectors of the economy.

Having said that, there is inertia in moving away from an unsustainable growth path, and this is because “we can’t manage what we can’t measure.” An economy’s Gross Domestic Product or GDP is a linear measure of growth, capturing only value of goods and services produced within its boundaries for a given year. It is not reflective of human or societal wellbeing or the state of ecosystems.

If there is a tsunami or earthquake for example, the economy may continue to register a growth in GDP due to the related manufacturing and repair expenses. It does not indicate the human misery or suffering of the people. We need a measure that captures the three-dimensional aspects of Human and Social Capital, Natural Capital as well as Financial and Physical Capital.

The environment provides the foundation upon which society can become healthy and wealthy. A severely deforested state of Haiti shows how losing natural capital has led to poverty, lack of economic development, increased child mortality and deterioration of maternal health. All these are interdependent. A green economy is as much about society, human well-being, and the natural environment.

A study by Green Accounting for Indian States Project (GIST) shows that the connection between loss of ecosystem services and poverty can be stark. In India, ecosystem services account for 7.3% of the GDP (based on 2002-2003 data). However, if you isolate the GDP of the poor, ecosystem services can constitute as much as 57% of the livelihoods they earn in small farming, small scale forestry, fisheries and animal husbandry. So degradation of the environment directly exacerbates poverty.

Which sectors should be given priority in a green economy?

The accumulation of risks resulting from the depletion of natural capital, can lead to various pressures such as a hike in food and oil prices. This directly affects the poor. A 1% loss in GDP could well translate into 20 million people going below the poverty line of US $1 a day.

A rule of thumb would be to allocate resources in sectors that create jobs. In the US, there are 2.3 million employed in the renewable energy sector, compared to 2 million in the oil refining sector. If projected investments in the renewable energy sector of US $630 million pan out by 2030 globally, there is potential for 20 million jobs to be created.

If the share of renewable energy in the total energy mix in the US were to increase from 5% as it is currently, to 25%, it would create a huge multiplier effect on employment without the contingent liabilities associated with carbon emissions.

In South Korea, the government has taken a leadership role in steering the economy towards green growth. The investment of US $1.5 billion in the Four Rivers Project, to clean up the rivers has created 350 thousand jobs. Such a project builds the ecological infrastructure, and the nation’s productive natural capital which is vital for the future.

There are big opportunities in increasing energy efficiency of buildings as the technology exists. It is estimated that in the US, an investment of US$100 billion over 4 years could generate 4 million new jobs. India could create 900,000 jobs by 2025 in biomass gasification.

There is considerable scope for bringing about efficiency in the agriculture sector as well. According to a study by the UNEP, when one accounts for various kinds of wastage in the food supply chain, from planting and harvesting in the fields, from the field to the table in the manufacturing process, discards in fisheries, and also the leakage that arises from using 1/3rd of the world’s cereal grains to feed livestock instead of people directly, food wastage could be as high as 50%.

How can we feed the rising population as well as preserve the biodiversity of the planet? The answer lies not in “more agriculture” but efficient agriculture through reduced wastage, organic farming and proper land allocation.

Why don’t we have a Green Economy yet?

A green economy is often easier said than done, because we can’t solve the problems with the same thinking that created them. Often it’s a question of inertia amongst policy makers, businesses and the public, who have to be convinced about the ROI and benefits of green economic growth.

Pavan highlighted that there are two broad enabling conditions that need to be addressed. The first is the International Policy Architecture which includes development of global markets for carbon as well as ecosystem services. Policies are needed for development and transfer of technologies, and for international trade, aid, and co-ordination.

The second enabling condition is in the area of Domestic Policies. These include dismantling lopsided subsidies to fossil fuels, taxes and policies that promote renewable energies, environmental legislation, integrated management of fresh water, policies for proper land use for urban and agricultural areas, monitoring and accounting of ecosystem services.

According to the Global Green New Deal report by the UNEP more than $300 billion are being spent on energy subsidies across developed and developing economies, the bulk of it on fossil fuels. Removing these subsidies would actually add 0.1% to global GDP and reduce global greenhouse gas emissions by 6%.

Mitigating the effects of climate change: The different colours of carbon

Often enough, there is a lot of focus on “brown carbon” or emissions from energy use and industry. Other types of carbon should be given weightage in mitigation efforts. ”Blue carbon” is the carbon stored in the oceans. In fact, they bind an estimated 55% of all carbon in living organisms. “Green carbon” refers to what is stored in the biomass of forests, agricultural lands and pastures. According to the IPCC 2007, by “halting the loss of ‘green’ and ‘blue’carbon, the world could mitigate as much as 25% of total GHG emissions, with co-benefits for biodiversity, food security and livelihoods”

“Black carbon“ is the soot generated by burning coal, biomass and biofuels, and can be reduced by adopting clean technologies.

Mangrove planting increases productivity by 80% in the ecosystem, and brings benefits of risk management against natural disasters and resilience for farming communities.

The study shows the incredible IRR range from 7% to 79% on projects that rebuild Ecological Infrastructure. The associated Cost Benefit ratios that have been calculated by the GEI team are 3-75 times in different ecosystems from coral reefs to rainforests to grasslands, which is significantly more than any conventional industrial project.

Global Green New Deal

The Global Green New Deal is a report by the Green Economy Initiative, launched by the UNEP in 2008. It outlines a global plan for governments and businesses to build green economies using 3 main pillars.

Firstly, valuing and mainstreaming nature’s services into national and international accounts. Secondly, employment generation through green jobs and the laying out the policies and thirdly, encouraging instruments and market signals able to accelerate a transition to a Green Economy.

According to the Deal, “one third of the around $2.5 trillion-worth of planned stimulus packages should be invested on ‘greening’ the world economy. The estimated $750 billion of green investment, equal to about one per cent of current global GDP, could trigger significant, multiple and potentially transformational returns.”

Unfortunately as the September 2009 update to the report notes, ” The effectiveness of the green stimulus risks being compromised by delays in allocation of funds. At the end of the first half of 2009, around only 3% of committed green funds had been disbursed. Moreover, many G20 members have not included sufficient green investments in their overall stimulus packages.”

As the world emerges out of recession, we have a historical opportunity to transform economies into engines of green growth. Technologies exist. Solutions exist. As Pavan pointed out in the Q&A, what is needed is the behaviourial change to bring about the transition. Change has to come from policy-makers , businesses and enlightened citizens who all need to push actively for this transition based on the new paradigm and mindset.

]]>http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2009/12/02/challenges-and-prospects-for-a-green-economy/feed/0Part 3/10: Saving the Planet by Using Less Energyhttp://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2009/09/29/part-310-saving-the-planet-by-using-less-energy/
http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2009/09/29/part-310-saving-the-planet-by-using-less-energy/#commentsTue, 29 Sep 2009 13:52:27 +0000http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/?p=823This is Part 3 of a 10 part series of blogs in support of the 10:10 campaigninitiated by Director, Franny Armstrong’s team to complement the documentary on global warming, “The Age of Stupid” . It is to enable each one of us to take action to reduce our carbon emissions by 10% in 2010. Download the 10 point family checklist from the campaign here. Though the campaign is targetted at the UK, the concept applies everywhere.

To put things in perspective, Heating and cooling take up most of a household’s electricity usage, according to this pie chart by Energy Star, USA.

There a number of other ways to reduce electricity consumption and we’re probably aware of most of them. The key issue is whether we’re consistently doing them, in a way that translates into lower electricity usage, and consequently lower carbon emissions.

1. Switch off and unplug electronic devices like TVs, DVD players, music systems and other electrical and electronic appliances when they are not in use. Also unplug cell phone chargers and battery chargers once the charging is done.

75% of an appliance’s energy use can be wasted simply powering its digital display on standby mode. Appliances on standby power are energy “vampires” and can consume up to 10% of the household’s power usage.

2. Buy equipment which use very little energy on automatic sleepor standby mode in case we do have to leave them occasionally on standby. Check with the retailer the specifications of the equipment when buying a new appliance.

3. Get a wattage reader device or a smart meter which shows how much energy each appliance at home is using up, whether the appliance is plugged in and operating or in standby mode. To learn more about smart meters, refer to this site http://www.energy-retail.org.uk/smartmeters.html

4. Consider buying or upgrading your appliances to the more energy efficient “Energy Star” rated appliances. In Singapore, the relevant rating is given by the Energy Label. Energy efficiency is a passive way to save electricity as we automatically make energy savings from Day One, and save money over the medium to long run. As the saying goes, “Energy saved is energy produced.”

5. Replace conventional light bulbs with energy saving light bulbs such as Compact Flourescent Lamps (CFL) as CFL bulbs use about 1/4th of the energy of a conventional light bulb and can last for 10,000 hours. A CFL bulb pays for itself after about 400 hours. They do contain a small quantity of mercury and should be disposed of carefully.

Light Emitting Diode (LED) bulbs are more expensive, but they have the advantage of not containing mercury. LED bulbs use 80-90% less energy than conventional bulbs and can last for about 100,000 hours. Here is an analysis of the different types of lighting.

6. Use light dimmers on indoor lights, as dimming saves up to half the electricity used and also extends the life of the bulb. Use of halogen lamps can create the same effect of softening lights – creating an ambience, as well as saving energy in the process.

7. Use natural light as much as possible and keep curtains open during the day. Position reading areas and work desks near the windows and bookshelves and cupboards in areas of the room where less light is needed.

8. Put your computer on sleep mode. Screen savers are not enough, as they consume as much energy as when the machine is on. These days computers are designed to handle 20,000 on-off cycles before the hard drives wear out, so switching off is a good idea when computers are not in use for extended periods of time.

9. Printers/Copiers are energy guzzlers and use a lot of energy when idle. Try to finish your printing /copying jobs at one go. Turn off the printer if you won’t be using it for more than 15 minutes.

10. Heating the water in the washing machine takes up the bulk of the electricity – up to 90%. It is not necessary to heat the water. Wash with a cold water setting or if necessary with a warm water setting instead of hot, to wash your clothes. The rinse cycle can always be in cold water. Wash with a full load as far as possible, as this is more energy efficient than washing two small loads.

11. If you could choose between a top loading machine and a front loading machine, choose the former, even though they may be slightly more expensive. Top loading machines are more efficient because their larger capacity translates into fewer loads. Top loading machines have faster spin cycles and use of less water to heat, translating into less energy used to dry the load.

12. Bake less, Cook more. Baking is actually a lot more energy intensive than cooking over the fire. In an electric oven, a lot of the heat is wasted in heating the steel and the air, before the food is cooked. Only about 5-10% of the total heat produced by the oven, is actually absorbed by the food. Try to cook meals that can use the fire directly.

13. Replace with an energy-efficient refrigerator if possible one with Greenfreeze technology. See http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/global-warming-and-energy/green-solutions/greenfreeze According to Greenpeace, ‘GreenFreeze is Greenpeace’s campaign to transform the refrigeration and cooling industries by eliminating the use of F-gases, the chemicals used to cool refrigerators, homes, cars, and food in stores and vending machines. F-gases were directly responsible for 17% of man-made climate change in 2005. F-gases are a group of industrial greenhouse gases that include hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs). The “F” in F-gas is for Fluorine, the element common to them all. ”

14. Keeping refrigerators too cold uses unnecessary electricity. If every fridge owner turned up the refrigerator up 1 degree F, it could prevent millions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. So reset the temperature of your refrigerator from 37 to 40 degrees F and adjust according to whether it’s the cold or hot season. This temperature range is normally sufficient to preserve foods.

15. Clean the condenser coils at the bottom or back of the refrigerator, once every few months. The coil removes heat from the inside and can’t function well if it is dusty and dirty. A clean coil means more energy efficiency.

16. Depending on where you live, buy green electricity – electricity that is produced from sources that do not emit carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere like coal-fired power plants or natural gas. Such sources can be solar, wind, hydroelectric, geothermal, ground source, wave power, tidal power, biomass or landfill gas. In the UK, refer to http://www.greenelectricity.org/ or for the rest of the world http://www.greenelectricity.org/international.html

17. Get an energy audit done by your utility company or an independent consultant. You’d know which areas of your home account for maximum energy usage, and where the leakage areas are. Get an idea of what a typical energy audit entails in this video. It’s more relevant for temperate countries, so you’ll have to apply what is in context for warmer climes.

Reducing electricity usage is not too difficult a task if we take action on some or all of the above on a consistent basis. You get to save money and save the planet in the process.

These are some of the ideas from the new free ebook that will be made available on this website, “A Quicklist of 1001 Steps to Save the Planet”

]]>http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2009/09/29/part-310-saving-the-planet-by-using-less-energy/feed/0Part 2b/10 Saving the Planet by Cooling Lesshttp://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2009/09/26/part-2b10-saving-the-planet-by-cooling-less/
http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2009/09/26/part-2b10-saving-the-planet-by-cooling-less/#commentsSat, 26 Sep 2009 02:51:12 +0000http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/?p=791This is Part 2b of a 10 part series of blogs in support of the 10:10 campaigninitiated by Franny Armstrong’s team to complement the documentary on global warming, “The Age of Stupid”. It is to enable each one of us to take action to reduce our carbon emissions by 10% in 2010. Download the 10 point family checklist from the campaign here.

The Checklist lists “Saving 10% on heating” as Step Number 2. I’ve modified this for warmer countries and included this section on reducing cooling bills from airconditioning. Here are the things you can do to reduce your cooling bills and the related carbon emissions from energy use.

1. Choose the airconditioner that is sized correctly for the room. If it’s too big or small for the room in terms of cooling capacity, it won’t not be efficient. Learn more about AC sizing in the US Department of Energy website under “Sizing Heating and Cooling Systems”

2. Unblock the condenser unit by clearing any debris or obstruction that may restrict the airflow. Ensure the condenser unit is not under direct sunlight. You can save about 10% of your AC bill by keeping the condenser unit in the shade.

3. Close doors and windows when air-conditioning is on, to prevent warm air from coming in. Make sure the seal between the air-conditioner and the window frame is airtight to prevent cool air from escaping outside. Use drapes and blinds to keep too much direct sunlight out.

4. Use a ceiling or standing fan instead of an air-conditioner. This can lead to huge energy savings. Make sure the fan is blowing down. If it faces up, it is only pushing back warm air from the ceiling back to the floor, and won’t give a cooling effect. When the air is cool outside, open the windows and let the breeze in.

5. Don’t overcool the room. Set temperature between 24 to 25 degrees Celsius. Adjusting your thermostat just two degrees higher can save hundreds of pounds of carbon dioxide through reduced electricity consumption.

6. Service your air-conditioners regularly. Cleaning both the evaporator coils (indoors) and the condenser coils (outdoors). Also check the refrigerant level which is the fluid enabling the cooling. Check that the compressor, fan, and all the electrical fittings inside are working properly. Clean air conditioning filters regularly, once a month preferably, to remove dust and allow for proper air flow. Unclog the drain channels of the airconditioner.

7. Choose the right air-conditioner settings. Instead of an “outside” air setting (which brings in warm air from outside) choose a “re-circulate” air setting which re-cools indoor air. A “high speed fan” setting helps save energy by blowing cool air into the room quickly. Keep your air-conditioner on “fan-mode” and use a ceiling or standing fan to supplement. This saves energy.

8. Use air-conditioners with Inverter technology. These vary the speed of the compressors, so when indoor temperatures reach a certain temperature level, the compressors are operated at low speeds to maintain the temperature. This saves more than 40% of energy costs compared to conventional air-conditioners which use the on/off technology. So Inverter systems are quieter, more energy efficient and place less stress on the equipment.

9. Use heat-resistant panels on windows. They keep indoor temperatures at 30°C even on extremely hot days. Reflective blinds also help to keep the room cooler.

10. Install a radiant barrier made of aluminium foil-like material on the underside of your roof (especially if you live in a house with a roof, or the top floor of a building). This blocks heat that falls on the roof, and keeps the top floor or attic cooler.

11. Install an attic fan on the roof of the house. Hot air tends to get trapped at the top of the house. The attic fan acts as an exhaust to help expel the hot air especially in multi-level establishments.

12. Switch off the airconditioner if you’re not going to come back to the room within half an hour or so. It’s not necessary to keep the house constantly cool. If you leave the AC on throughout the day, it is constantly absorbing heat which it has to cool, and this wastes energy.

13. Reduce heat sources. Conventional light bulbs give 10% light and 90% heat, which has to be cooled by the AC. Instead use compact fluorescent bulbs (CFL) which give off about 80% less heat, and use about a quarter of the energy.

Also make sure that while cooking, shut the kitchen door. The hot air from the kitchen won’t reduce the AC’s cooling effect this way.

14. Plant trees outside the house if you have a garden. They have a natural cooling effect on the house.

15. Choose or build a house with north-south orientation, as this absorbs less heat, as less direct sunlight falls on it. Preferably use light paints on your walls, rather than dark colours which absorb more heat.

The ideas are from the free e-book which will be made available soon on this website called, “A Quicklist of 1001 Steps to Save the Planet”

]]>http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2009/09/26/part-2b10-saving-the-planet-by-cooling-less/feed/0Part 2a/10 Saving the Planet by Heating Lesshttp://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2009/09/25/part-2a10-saving-the-planet-by-heating-less/
http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2009/09/25/part-2a10-saving-the-planet-by-heating-less/#commentsFri, 25 Sep 2009 11:35:04 +0000http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/?p=777This is Part 2a of a 10 part series of blogs in support of the 10:10 campaigninitiated by Franny Armstrong’s team to complement the documentary on global warming, “The Age of Stupid” . It is to enable each one of us to take action to reduce our carbon emissions by 10% in 2010. Download the 10 point family checklist from the campaign here.

The Checklist lists “Saving 10% on heating” as Step Number 2. Here are some of the ways in which you can reduce your heating bills and save the planet with lesser carbon emissions:

1. Seal or caulk windows using a window sealant to prevent heat from escaping through the windows. Tightly sealed windows ensure that cold drafts or air are kept out. An easy way to check for drafts is by moving a light tissue paper near the edges of the windows, to check if they flutter gently.

2. Get your furnace tuned up and serviced before the onset of winter, to ensure that your heating system functions efficiently. A furnace servicing would involve checking if these are all in order: All electrical parts and components, air fuel mixture, oil motors, heat exchanger for cracks (as this introduces carbon monoxide into the room), thermostat, filters, and evaporator coils.

3. Use a boiler blanket that’s appropriate for your boiler’s model. This serves to insulate it and retain the heat.

4. Put door sweeps to ensure cold air doesn’t enter from under the doors. Install a storm door which is aluminium-clad. This will insulate the doorway of your home.

Here are some of the ways to reducing the heating bills from your Water Heaters :

1. Turn down default water heater settings. By reducing the thermostat by only a few degrees would save 5-10% of your water heating bill, and millions of tons of CO2, if hundreds of thousands of people did the same. Install a timer to turn off the water heater automatically especially for storage type water heaters which can keep sucking in energy by trying to keep the water hot.

2. Insulate your water heater by covering it with an insulating jacket that is usually available at hardware stores. This will prevent heat from being lost, and upto 10% of the energy costs of the water heater could be saved.

3. Insulate the pipes that come out of the water heater for the first five to ten feet with slip-on foam sleeves. These are usually available at hardware stores and help to prevent loss of heat as the water travels around the house.

4. Much of the energy used by a water heater is used to maintain the water’s temperature in the water heater tank, even if no hot water is drawn out. This energy is called a “standby loss” This wastage of energy often adds up to about 20% of a household’s water heating costs.

Install a “Tank-less” Water Heater or “instant water heaters” or “on demand heater”. They are more energy efficient, as they only heat water as and when required and do not store hot water. For more information, look at http://www.tanklesswaterheaterguide.com/

5. Drain about a cup of water from the valve faucet at the bottom of the water heater (after switching off the heater, of course) once every 3 to 4 months. This prevents sediments from building up in the water tank and makes it more efficient.

The ideas are from the free e-book which will be made available soon on this website called, “A Quicklist of 1001 Steps to Save the Planet”

]]>http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2009/09/25/part-2a10-saving-the-planet-by-heating-less/feed/0The 10:10 campaign to reduce carbon emissionshttp://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2009/09/25/the-1010-campaign-to-reduce-carbon-emissions/
http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/2009/09/25/the-1010-campaign-to-reduce-carbon-emissions/#commentsFri, 25 Sep 2009 05:44:56 +0000http://www.ecowalkthetalk.com/blog/?p=753The 10:10 campaign has been initiated by Franny Armstrong’s team to complement the documentary on global warming, “The Age of Stupid” enabling each one of us to take action in our lives to reduce our emissions.

As the 10:10 website points out, the idea of the campaign is “By committing to cut your emissions by 10% in 2010, you will join thousands of individuals, schools, hospitals, businesses and organisations all actively helping to combat climate change by making simple changes to their lifestyles, homes and workplaces.”

The website provides a convenient 10 step family checklist which can be downloaded. Ideas are also provided for companies, schools and colleges, and other organisations. These 10 steps are:

Earth Hour 2009 has a nice buzz around it, in contrast to last year, when it passed by almost incognito. Just look at the response this year to Earth Hour, a global event initiated by WWF Australia and The Sydney Morning Herald in 2007. Compared to 35 countries who participated in 2008, today we’ll see people from more than 2100 countries, switching off their lights and all non-essential electrical and electronic devices, between 8.30 pm and 9.30 pm local time, and bask in the darkness of the sky. At least in theory. We’ll see what happens tonight!

Will it really make a difference?

Globally, we emit 27 billion tons of CO2 every year. Will turning off our lights for merely an hour, for only one day in a year make a difference? I don’t think it will even scratch the surface of the problem, and in all the hype surrounding Earth Hour, we must not be lulled into a sense of complacency about the sheer magnitude of the problem of global warming.

Where Earth Hour does make a huge impact is at a symbolic level. Precisely because the scale of the issue of global warming is so large, this act helps to keep it on our radar screen, and perhaps a little higher on the political agenda.

If your city turns truly dark tonight, it will only go to show how much of a difference our collective actions can make. It’s a learning for all of us to extend that lesson to other areas of our lives too, including recycling, reducing our consumption, changing the quality of our consumption to environmentally friendly options.

Personally, I don’t really mind more Earth Hours, once a month, maybe even once a week. We’ll manage, for Earth’s sake. Besides, it would be rather nice to see the stars in the city skies a bit more often, and give ourselves a break from all the electrical and electronic gadgets that rule our lives.

If you can’t see comments to this blog, please click on the title and scroll to the bottom.